Some topics tend to get heated and go off track in unwholesome ways quite quickly. The "hot topics" sub-forum is a place where such topics may be moved so that each post must be manually approved by moderator before it will become visible to members.

Consider a person in average health intent on training for, running in, and completing his first marathon. He has never run a marathon before, nor run any distance even comparable. He might ask, "What's wrong with carrying a 50 lb backpack while I run the marathon?" One who knows about such things might answer, "Because it will hinder you. It will make you more unlikely to reach your goal. Wise runners do not recommend carrying a 50lb backpack while running a marathon if one doesn't need to."

Some questions we've seen in this thread...

"So you're saying I shouldn't run with a 50lb backpack?" I wouldn't say should or shouldn't. I would say it isn't recommended.

"Does that mean anyone who runs with a backpack will not reach the goal?" Some will and some won't. Depends on the individual. Whether you will or won't is beyond my ability to tell.

"Does that mean those that run with a backpack aren't properly called 'runners'?" They are runners. They might be unwise runners, they might be non-serious runners, they might be deluded runners... but they are runners.

Just wanted to share this as I think it makes my view of the OP's question clearer and thought it might prove useful to some of you.

Are you seriously still trying to argue this?
Or is this another joke that I have failed to grasp.

metta
Jack

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

How much "weight" are we going to give to [insert behavior here] in the overall scheme of things?

That question could be used to rationalize any number of behaviors.

How is it that we rationalize the perpetuation of that which is not conducive to awakening? This is a very good question. In my opinion the act of rationalizing is often more binding than the acts being rationalized. Masturbation tends to sap one of the will to be caring and outgoing and it reinforces the burning desire to pursue sexual activity as a means of deriving physical pleasure. If we pay attention and see how unhelpful this is, we will not only begin to become disenchanted with this activity but we will also begin to see other more positive and inspiring possibilities on our horizon. There is no need for rationalization. On the other hand I think there is minimal value in abstinence without a consistent and open inquiry into its value. This is because I think the energy which one uses to avoid an activity which they feel compelled to do often negates the energy saved by avoiding it.

Take care all

Gabe

"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332

Peter wrote:
Consider a person in average health intent on training for, running in, and completing his first marathon. He has never run a marathon before, nor run any distance even comparable. He might ask, "What's wrong with carrying a 50 lb backpack while I run the marathon?" One who knows about such things might answer, "Because it will hinder you. It will make you more unlikely to reach your goal. Wise runners do not recommend carrying a 50lb backpack while running a marathon if one doesn't need to."

That's a pretty good analogy. I like sports analogies and that makes some sense. Running with the weight can still get you to the goal (finish line), but will definitely slow you down.

In the same way, many Buddhists refer to the monastic life as the "short path" and the lay life as the "long path." Both will still get you to the other shore, but one might be shorter. As lay people we are carrying around baggage and weights. How much each weight is? That would depend on the type of activity and the intention.

Instead of a weight, we could count some things as a complete block or brick wall, stopping you in your tracks, such as killing, stealing, etc. But sexual behavior which is not misconduct, could be seen as the extra weights in this analogy, not a brick wall.

TheDhamma wrote:
That's a pretty good analogy. I like sports analogies and that makes some sense. Running with the weight can still get you to the goal (finish line), but will definitely slow you down.

In the same way, many Buddhists refer to the monastic life as the "short path" and the lay life as the "long path." Both will still get you to the other shore, but one might be shorter. As lay people we are carrying around baggage and weights. How much each weight is? That would depend on the type of activity and the intention.

Instead of a weight, we could count some things as a complete block or brick wall, stopping you in your tracks, such as killing, stealing, etc. But sexual behavior which is not misconduct, could be seen as the extra weights in this analogy, not a brick wall.

This sums up my feelings well Tilt.
Generally it's not misconduct, it's not something anyone should feel guilty about doing. But whether masturbation weighs in at 50lbs or 5lbs, it stills weighs one down. It is something to be abandoned, in the end.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

How much "weight" are we going to give to [insert behavior here] in the overall scheme of things?

That question could be used to rationalize any number of behaviors.

No less than the original metaphor, which is obviously stacked in favor of a particular point of view. Why 50 lbs in the back pack? Why not 3.75 lbs? Or 84.13 lbs? Is not the metaphorical weight that the person carries in his or her metaphorical backpack going to depend upon any number of factors?

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723